NOTE: This document was originally issues in January 2009, but has been updated as of May 2009.

“Only a marriage between a man and a woman is valid in this State.” (1)

• Maryland law (but not its constitution) defines marriage as between a man and a woman.

• A 2005 lawsuit claimed that Maryland’s marriage law was unconstitutional because it violated the state’s equal rights amendment, which bans gender discrimination.

• The state’s highest court disagreed with the claim above and, in September 2007, issued a final ruling upholding Maryland’s marriage law (see questions 3 and 4).

• The court also said, however, that the General Assembly could overturn the law and redefine marriage if it chose to do so.

• In the last several legislative sessions, the General Assembly has considered four types of bills relating to marriage (see question 5).

• The General Assembly, in the course of the 2008 and 2009 session, approved three “limited” benefits domestic partnership bills that grant marriage-equivalency status to unmarried couples for the purposes of medical decision-making, and the property transfer and inheritance taxes.

• In May 2009, it was announced that Maryland’s attorney general is considering whether the state should recognize same-sex marriages performed out-of-state.

• It is widely believed that a full same-sex marriage bill will not be seriously considered until after the 2010 elections, when all state offices will be on the ballot.

The state’s high court ruled in 2007 that the equal rights amendment governs relationships between the sexes; that it never was intended to apply to same-sex relationships. Therefore, the court said, the law “does not discriminate on the basis of sex,” and is constitutional. At the same time, however, the door is not closed on same-sex marriage. The court also stated that its “opinion should by no means be read to imply that the General Assembly may not grant and recognize for homosexual persons civil unions or the right to marry a person of the same sex.” (2) The decision to maintain or overturn the state’s marriage law was left to the people of Maryland and to the democratic process.

It affirmed the vital role marriage between a man and a woman plays in securing a stable society: “In light of the fundamental nature of procreation, and the importance placed on it by the Supreme Court [of the United States], safeguarding an environment most conducive to the stable propagation and continuance of the human race is a legitimate government interest.” (3) The court added that, “In light of Maryland’s history of limiting marriage to those unions between members of the opposite sex, coupled with the policy choices of nearly every other state in the Nation, we do not find that same-sex marriage is so deeply rooted in this State or the country as a whole that is should be regarded at this time as a fundamental right.” (4)

Four kinds of marriage-related bills have been introduced in the last several sessions:

• A constitutional amendment to protect marriage as the union of one man and one woman. This would prevent additional constitutional challenges to the state’s marriage law, and would need approval by voters in a statewide referendum.

• A same-sex marriage bill, entitled the “Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act,” to grant same-sex couples the right to marry. The title of the bill is misleading. The “religious freedom” it refers to is merely an acknowledgement that religious institutions would not be forced to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies, but it would not offer any additional religious liberty protections. Moreover, the bill would not protect civil marriage; it attempts to redefine it.

• A civil union bill to provide the same benefits as marriage without using the term “marriage.”

• Other efforts (limited benefits domestic partnership bills) to extend some limited benefits currently unavailable to unmarried couples, whether same-sex or heterosexual. Three of these types of bills have passed so far - two in 2008 and one in 2009. These "limited" benefits domestic partnership bills undermine the legal definition of marriage by granting marriage-equivalency status to unmarried couples in parts of the health and tax statutes.

• The Church supports efforts, including a state constitutional amendment, to protect traditional marriage.

• The Church opposes the “Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act” and other efforts to alter the legal definition of marriage through same-sex marriage or civil union bills.

• The Church does not oppose efforts to allow all unmarried couples access to certain rights automatically granted to married couples, such as medical decision making rights, as long as the proposals do not create an alternative legal definition of marriage, or impose requirements on private institutions contrary to their moral or religious beliefs. (See also Question 13). The three "limited" benefits domestic partnership bills passed in 2008 and 2009 and that are now law undermine marriage by granting marriage-equivalency status to unmarried couples in certain parts of the law.

Man and woman, by their nature, have the unique capacity to create new life through their sexual union. Marriage is therefore properly entrusted only to them. While marriage benefits both husband and wife, the legal protections afforded this relationship are most important for children. A child deserves a stable and nurturing environment that is best provided by the marriage of his or her biological mother and father.

The state grants privileges to, and demands responsibilities of, marriage between man and woman to promote the procreation of children and provide for their proper care. The state rightly recognizes this as the only relationship that begets children. Furthermore, the stability of marriage is inextricably connected to the stability of the social order, and to the continued stability of future generations. (5) “The U.S. Supreme Court has traditionally viewed marriage, not as a vehicle for satisfying the adult couple or individuals, but as ‘the foundation of the family and of society, without which there would be neither civilization nor progress.’” (6)

Federal law recognizes marriage as “a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife.” (7) Laws in 37 states, Maryland included, define marriage as between one man and one woman. Thirty states have constitutional amendments that protect marriage - meaning in every state where the question was put to voters, they have upheld traditional marriage. Of those 30 states, 27 have passed the amendments within the past five years. Five states have legalized same-sex marriage*. Three states recognize civil unions; the District of Columbia and four additional states recognize domestic partnerships. The District of Columbia and New York State recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states(8)

*Includes Vermont and Maine, though those same-sex marriage laws don't go into effect until Sept. 2009 and voters in Maine are working hard to bring a referendum to uphold traditional marriage.

In terms of legal benefits, very little. The difference is in name only, since same-sex couples, whether joined by marriage or by a civil union would have the same access to state-based benefits. New Jersey’s law, which is nearly identical to the laws in the three other states that recognize civil unions, says that, “Civil union couples shall have all of the same benefits, protections and responsibilities under law…as are granted to spouses in a marriage.” (9)

“The fundamental right to marry is not absolute,” according to Maryland’s high court. Furthermore, the U.S. Supreme Court only recognizes a fundamental right to marry because of marriage’s “inextricable link to procreation, which necessarily and biologically involves participation (in ways either intimate or remote) by a man and a woman.” (10) The state also protects marriage by considering other limitations before granting a marriage license, including a couple’s age, mental competence, and blood relationship.

Parental rights, tax benefits, property disposition rights, medical decision-making and hospital visitation rights, and access to health and life insurance coverage.

Specific benefits must be considered on a case by case basis. The Church does not oppose allowing any two adults, regardless of marital status, to access certain benefits so long as alternative relationships are not granted legal status that is equivalent to marriage. For example, the Church supports the right of all people to designate someone to make medical decisions for them or visit them in the hospital. The Church opposes efforts that would compel it or other private institutions to violate their religious or moral beliefs.

Yes, significant benefits automatically provided to married couples are also already available
to all unmarried couples. They include:
• the ability to adopt children

• health and life insurance coverage for domestic partners if requested by an employer

• same-sex partners of state employees receive benefits

• “limited” domestic partnership benefits that include the ability to make medical decisions for each other and exemption from property transfer and inheritance taxes

Drastically altering the legal definition of marriage in Maryland by recognizing same-sex marriage or civil unions is not necessary to achieve these benefits because they already exist in law. Instead, approving a same-sex marriage or civil union bill would significantly undermine the legal, social, and cultural status of marriage that is appropriately assigned only to the union of one man and one woman.

-----------------------------------------------------------
(1) Maryland Family Law §2–201.
(2) Conaway v. Deane, Court of Appeals of Maryland, September, 2007
(3) Ibid.
(4) Ibid.
(5) W. Bradford Wilcox et al. 2005. Why Marriage Matters, Second Edition: Twenty-Six Conclusions from the Social Sciences. Institute for American Values at www.americanvalues.org
(6) Maynard v. Hill 125 U.S. 190, 211 (1888), quoted in How Does Legalizing “Same-Sex
Marriage” Deny the True Nature of Marriage? USCCB.
(7) The Defense of Marriage Act, 1 U.S.C. Section 7
(8) State Policies on Same-Sex Marriage and A History of Same-Sex Marriage Laws, Pew Research Center at www.stateline.org
(9) New Jersey Statute Title 37 1-31. See also Connecticut Statute, Title 46b, Chapter 815f, §46b-38nn; New Hampshire Statute, Title XLIII, Chapter 457-A, §6; and Vermont Statute, Title 15, Chapter 23, § 1204a.
(10) Conaway v. Deane, Court of Appeals of Maryland, September 2007.